User talk:Zeke Essiestudy/May 2015-August 2018

Talkback

Hello, Zeke Essiestudy. You have new messages at Zeke Essiestudy's talk page.
Message added 03:50, 9 May 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Is it really so bad that you're talking back to yourself? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 03:50, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

You can't ban an IP address even if you did it is easy to change it good try though Treyj457 (talk) 03:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: WMF staff

Hi,

Please note that the right way to verify User:JCrespo (WMF)'s affiliation would be sending an email to jcrespowikimedia.org or contacting someone at the Foundation. Please note that the user may not be able to answer in-wiki due to internal policies or the fact that the account is not yet even autoconfirmed. Regards, --jynus (talk) 12:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

May 2015

I noticed that a message you recently left to Alskalsk may have been unduly harsh for a newcomer. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Also, see WP:DONTFEED and WP:NPA Mifter (talk) 17:44, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Seems an appropriate bite. The editor was blocked indef. By you. --Epeefleche (talk) 18:32, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Zeke is not an admin. He just reported that user. I've never seen that "you have continued to vandalize" banner used before and I'm not sure if it's necessary, and if it has to look so dramatic. And it may be a bad idea to point out to every vandal that we have a special page for reporting so that the vandal can go there and vandalize that page too. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

I think Epeefleche is talking to Mifter. And I did not post the link to the noticeboard, so... Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 18:51, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Did you create that template? I think we should have some sort of a discussion somewhere about whether the use of it is a good idea or not. In either case I think the red background is a little too much. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:59, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

@Zeke ... that correct. Thanks for clarifying it for Jeraphine. Epeefleche (talk) 03:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't use it very much. I toned down the template on Alskalsk's page, though. I will stop using it if it isn't worthy. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 19:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

User talk:Wikipedia

I declined the speedy deletion of User talk:Wikipedia because there had been no prior deletion discussion for the page. It has been speedily deleted numerous times, but I didn't see any evidence of a deletion discussion which would be required for a deletion under WP:CSD#G4. If some other speedy deletion criterion applies, feel free to request deletion under that other criterion. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:23, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

L235 has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

--L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 02:12, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

MfD nomination of longtitlepage

Wikipedia:Assume the good faith assumption that everyone has the assumption of everyone assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming the assumption of good faith, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Assume the good faith assumption that everyone has the assumption of everyone assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming the assumption of good faith and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Assume the good faith assumption that everyone has the assumption of everyone assuming good faith, assuming that you are assuming the assumption of good faith during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The user Deepakpt625

Looking at the pages they created all of them seem to have some really bad English language writing skills-you might want to check them all out. Wgolf (talk) 17:56, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

June 2015

Hi, I am Fazbear7891 (talk). I wanted to let you know that I did not undo one or more of your recent contributions to User:ClueBot Commons/Praise with this edit because it did not appear unconstructive. If you would not like to experiment, please do not use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. --Fazbear7891 (talk) 22:11, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

SPI colors

Thanks for your help in improving colors, but keep in mind that to change a color, 4 separate pages have to be edited, not just the one template you're editing, and I think like 2 of them require the admin bit, so I'd prefer if you just told me what you want to do so I can do it properly for you. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Ah. I changed "onhold" to the lighter shade of purple/indigo because the current one looks kind of jarring.

Itailevi00's username takes a little more effort to see than the black text/usernames around him. The hex color I used was EAE0FF. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Yea, I saw, I just think #EAE0FF is too pale to be useful for at-a-glance evaluation. I'll try to find a middleground because the bluelinks-on-vividviolet scheme is tough to read, as you've pointed out. :) ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 22:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

• The changes I just made should assuage your concerns -- you can easily see them inside the collapsed box here. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 23:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Non-admin closure

I just came across this. It's probably not a good idea to make this closure, for two reasons:

1. You !voted then closed the same way you !voted. Generally people do not close an AfDs they have contributed to.
2. Closing with a "speedy" is generally an admin closure, and the admin then performs the deletion. With a non-admin it might be seen as a way to make a "delete" close, contrary to practice.

Personally I don't think any harm was done, and I have a fairly liberal attitude to things like non-admin closure, but I think it is worth treading carefully in these areas. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC).

I don't think I did anything that wrong. I closed it prematurely because as soon as I tagged the page, an administrator deleted it, so I just figured I'd close it because there....wasn't really a page to debate about on that AfD anymore. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:02, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Robert Toonititusa

It's okay to revert the removal of a speedy delete tag by the article creator. It's not okay to remove the content along with it.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:03, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Namaste

Have we interacted before? How did you chance upon my talk page? Thanks. --AmritasyaPutra^T 17:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I was looking back at an Arbitration case I commented on, which included someone being a total hypocrite by using sock accounts, and I noticed one of the said sock puppets was unblocked, which was very interesting. I'm guessing that you got your name cleared. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Day 6 page

I was looking at the page's edit history today and saw that in the description for one of your edits from the September 7th you had asked "What the fuck is going on?" I don't know if you found out about it another way or not yet but what happened was one of the members themselves vandalized the page and posted their edit on Instagram and twitter so all their fans could see his funny edit. I swung by to just to check out how that went down which is pretty much what I expected would happen. Peachywink (talk) 13:36, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

So there's a case of someone editing their own page... Does it qualify for WP:COIN? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 13:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Probably but I'm betting he used an IP. I think it was a onetime joke by the artist, but unfortunately now some of the fans want to try it too.Peachywink (talk) 18:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

I see.... Well then, I strongly advise his fans not to do what he did. Sure, it might be funny if one of the members did it, but his fans...eh....... no. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:07, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

---

Also, LOL, I've only just noticed this today, which happened while I was on vacation. OccultZone being a revealed hypocrite and accusing me for being a sock of someone I've never heard of when I was just interested in the case? What an intriguing development! XP Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 13:14, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

"Terrorizing"

Yeah, I am surely a Taliban. (Nope.) --Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 19:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

But what's up with you going all out on that editor by nominating all of their pages for deletion? What is wrong with ANY of those articles? I smell something fishy.... Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 22:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

You guys have all been assuming bad faith on these nominations. The reasons of these are perfectly fine, most of them do not pass the GNG, and never will. Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 22:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Hernán Trizano This page has at least two references and it lists him as an Army officer. He's had an image since 2010, and there are also things called stubs. It seems more like a case of trying to get payback because this other person saw legitimate problems with some articles you contributed to/created. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 05:19, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

lol, ok, let's get hypocritical and put an end to all of this. --Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 19:39, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

DDR reverts

Did you follow the edit summary link? The redirects were a delayed action on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_112#DDR where it was agreed that the articles should be summarized in a list function. Most of the articles redirected had no sourced content to merge and should be expanded in a list format as suggested. Please revert your edits. czar 22:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

I undid everything except DDRMAX2 and moreso its USA counterpart. I think those articles have enough information to me a standardized article. It will take some time for me to find sources for DDRMAX2 AC, though, because it definitely originates in Japan. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 08:07, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, sounds good, but the two articles without sources should remain redirected while you work on finding sources for them (unsourced articles shouldn't remain in mainspace). You can make a copy and work on them in private draft. czar 15:19, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure DDRMAX2 USA has at least one source already. As for the JP version, though, I went to Google news and...surprisingly the only thing of interest is this one article where someone has a heart attack playing the machine, and even then, it's uncertain whether it's DDRMAX2. :/ Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 09:23, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

SPI Clerk Application

Thank you for your interest in SPI clerking. At this time we are going to be removing your application as we have sufficient trainees for this round. We would invite you to re-apply down the road if you are interested further. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 19:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

My SPI

Thanks. When I filed it I had a number of problems that I've never had before - it was acting very strangely, not showing alleged socks, my evidence, etc. Doug Weller (talk) 17:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I figured out why this happened. I noticed you accidentally typed "|sock2= User:Clarification in perception}}", so I think the same happened with sock1, which abruptly ended the template. In the future, just use sock1=Gold Toe Brands (for instance), it'll do the rest automatically. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 11:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I missed out the [[]] bit the first time. Doug Weller (talk) 12:16, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

ಮುನೀರ್ ಕಾಟಿಪಳ್

Regarding the above, please read the instructions at WP:PNT, the prod was fully in line with procedure for untranslated articles--Jac16888 ^Talk 23:03, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh. That's a shame, then, it looked like it would be a good addition to the encyclopedia (it was at least 2 pages big with quite a bit of references) if it was translated. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 00:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox

Please stop filling the entire sandbox with smileys, Wikipedia's not a playground and so if you're unable to act like an adult then I would suggest you find another hobby!, I would expect that sort of crap from an IP/Vandal.... not someone who's been here nearly a year.... –Davey2010^Talk 05:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Davey2010 Sorry. I'll stop. Just so you know, I didn't even notice your first revert, I'm sorry if I came off as a vandal that time. I assumed it wasn't personally being deleted, just by other tests or the bot. I'll stop now. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 05:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Be careful

You are helping a sockpuppet that has a very large list of accounts. He is blocked again. I returned to the original edition. Be careful. Thanks.--Bleckter (talk) 06:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry. I saw hostility and I wasn't sure who's side I was on so I just reverted to the last change before you and the IP. And then I see that clearly the IP's side is... not quite reliable. Thanks for notifying me, though. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:35, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Bike Biz

Hi, thanks for the quick action on Bike Biz. However, I think you might have made a mistake on the criterion - perhaps you meant criterion G11 not G1? G1 is for completely incomprehensible text, not something like this. G11 is the category for promotional material. Blythwood (talk) 10:23, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Oops. Yep, I incorrectly specified G1. It should be G11 and G12. Thanks for notifying me. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 10:24, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem, it's fixed. Signing off now, thanks for the quick action once again. Blythwood (talk) 10:25, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Zeke Essiestudy/Ŏ︵ŏ

User:Zeke Essiestudy/Ŏ︵ŏ, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Zeke Essiestudy/Ŏ︵ŏ and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Zeke Essiestudy/Ŏ︵ŏ during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 15:34, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox reverting

Why do you keep reverting edits on the Sandbox? Ekdoteenchar (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

You're blanking active tests I'm trying to perform and thwarting them from working. The sandbox clearly says it's for test edits, and blanking other people's tests before they're done with them comes off as disruptive editing. The sandbox is cleared every hour by a bot... not every minute. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Removal request of the article Hüseyin Mutlu Akpınar

Thank you for your guidance about the article, being my first article I made some mistakes. I added citations and references to the article. I don't know what to do next, is it enough that I inform you or should I apply anywhere else to remove the removal request. Thank you! Bkostem (talk) 10:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

speedy deletion

If both of my pages are just deleted!! & i obviously dont even understand why this is happening to me, then how should i react? please teach me that as well! You are not telling me, dont write this, dont write that. i created the page for a "public figure" you deleted it, few hours later! :P so I dont know how to act or respond any more! Those that mess up my grandpa's name, they were allowed to continue. but when i came to correct it, or re-make it, my page was put on deletion! this should be called what? please respond.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullahshaheenmadni (talk • contribs) 17:44, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Your page is coming off as spammy. This "Dr. Malik Ghulam Murtaza" has no references, which in turn doesn't indicate why he's notable for a Wikipedia article. I've personally never heard of him... but there are many people I haven't heard about, but if you can simply provide references from other parties (not Wikipedia, and not ANYTHING YOU HAVE SOME ASSOCIATION WITH), then I think the article will stay. Sorry if I'm not much help. I'm younger than 75% of the website and am stil relatively new to making articles. You might wanna ask RHaworth, the person who deleted your page, for more advice about articles. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 21:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Mobile Apps Performance Testing

Hi Zeke,

The link you have mentioned is my white paper shared on Linkedin by me. This is not a copyright material.

Thanks, Devendra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dev123456789 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Great... but in that case it might be still violating WP:COI. You'll need to find some other sources that you aren't involved in to reference if you want to make your draft an article. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 15:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

It actually is a copyright violation. If you don't specifically apply a copyright that is compatible with Wikipedia's it's considered copyrighted using another form. It was also completely unreferenced.

I just came to discuss with Zeke though. This is a sandbox. It's frequently wiped. I'm not sure a CSD is needed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Walter Görlitz Maybe revdeletes might be appropriate then?? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 15:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I could see that being an option, but is it necessary? Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Re: Hi

Hello Zeke Essiestudy -- I've blocked the IP for 12 hours, which hopefully should be enough to make him/her desist. By the way, I'm not really a good admin to ask about blocking; I hardly ever perform it. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 19:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

February 2016

Hello, I'm Linguist111. I noticed that you made a comment in the summary of an edit you made to the page Topmodel (cycle 2) that didn't seem very civil. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Linguist 111^talk 20:28, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Re: GoAnimate edits

Hi Zeke,

The reason I removed the images is that they may conflict with copyright. I have removed other content that was abusive or blatantly false previously, and I agree with your previous comment that this page should continue to be semi-protected.

If you have any other questions, please feel free to send me a message.

Thank you, spaekona — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spækona (talk • contribs) 00:18, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I respect your intentions, but unfortunately there are a couple of things wrong with why you're doing this. If you're actually doing this because GoAnimate themselves asked you to, then you may be violating Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy. In the past, before I made an account, I witnessed Wikipedia drama about how Yank Barry tried using his PR to whitewash his article and after four editors repeatedly stopped the edits he filed out a lawsuit against them. If you are certain GoAnimate does not want the images in the article please direct them to this page so that they can discuss things. Additionally, just because an image isn't approved by the copyright owner doesn't ALWAYS mean it's not suitable for Wikipedia. You may want to see Wikipedia's non-free content policy. Specifically;

• "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose."
• "Content. Non-free content meets general Wikipedia content standards and is encyclopedic."
• "Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding."

I will be restoring the images, and if there's still concerns you may wanna try gaining a larger input on the article using dispute resolution. Pinging Deli nk who intended to restore the images before I did. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 00:35, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

April Fool's Day

Please keep jokes out of the mainspace. See Wikipedia:April 1 guidelines and Wikipedia:Rules for Fools. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:13, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April Fools' Day (4th nomination)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April Fools' Day (4th nomination), is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 22:05, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Vandalize

Zeke, you actually wouldn't stop much to vandalize because like you said if you managed to ban someone's IP address they could just change it easily therefore you can't do much. Treyj457 (talk) 22:48, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

You're right. You can change it by unplugging the modem and back again. However, realize that say your current IP is 52.373.24.235, and your new IP is 52.373.256.22, notice they both begin with 52.373. Administrators can block all IP addresses starting with those 5 numbers, see Wikipedia:Blocking_IP_addresses#Range_blocks. So you're wrong. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 01:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism edits?

I've never made edits to Wikipedia. I don't know why I'm getting messages about vandalism. I don't know who those people are that you left messages about, but I've never edited a Wikipedia page before. If this is the wrong way to tell you that you've made a mistake, I'm sure you'll figure it out on your own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.192.69.148 (talk) 14:08, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

...okay? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 15:48, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Zeke Essiestudy,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Zeke Essiestudy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Zeke Essiestudy. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

O.k i will not edit

Manavatha (talk) 20:00, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Received your message

I agree i will not edit. Manavatha (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

By any chance, are you not familiar on the "Preview" button when editing? Your hectic 44 edits in a row (mostly minor) on that page seem to suggest that. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2018 (UTC)